From: Jason Wang <[email protected]>
To: Ming Lei <[email protected]>
Cc: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>,
[email protected], [email protected],
David Howells <[email protected]>,
Pavel Begunkov <[email protected]>,
Chengming Zhou <[email protected]>,
[email protected], [email protected],
Stefan Hajnoczi <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3] io_uring: fix IO hang in io_wq_put_and_exit from do_exit()
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2023 15:04:05 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CACGkMEvP=f1mB=01CDOhHaDLNL9espKPrUffgHEdBVkW4fo=pw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZPs81IAYfB8J78Pv@fedora>
On Fri, Sep 8, 2023 at 11:25 PM Ming Lei <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Sep 08, 2023 at 08:44:45AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > On 9/8/23 8:34 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
> > > On Fri, Sep 08, 2023 at 07:49:53AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > >> On 9/8/23 3:30 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
> > >>> diff --git a/io_uring/io_uring.c b/io_uring/io_uring.c
> > >>> index ad636954abae..95a3d31a1ef1 100644
> > >>> --- a/io_uring/io_uring.c
> > >>> +++ b/io_uring/io_uring.c
> > >>> @@ -1930,6 +1930,10 @@ void io_wq_submit_work(struct io_wq_work *work)
> > >>> }
> > >>> }
> > >>>
> > >>> + /* It is fragile to block POLLED IO, so switch to NON_BLOCK */
> > >>> + if ((req->ctx->flags & IORING_SETUP_IOPOLL) && def->iopoll_queue)
> > >>> + issue_flags |= IO_URING_F_NONBLOCK;
> > >>> +
> > >>
> > >> I think this comment deserves to be more descriptive. Normally we
> > >> absolutely cannot block for polled IO, it's only OK here because io-wq
> > >
> > > Yeah, we don't do that until commit 2bc057692599 ("block: don't make REQ_POLLED
> > > imply REQ_NOWAIT") which actually push the responsibility/risk up to
> > > io_uring.
> > >
> > >> is the issuer and not necessarily the poller of it. That generally falls
> > >> upon the original issuer to poll these requests.
> > >>
> > >> I think this should be a separate commit, coming before the main fix
> > >> which is below.
> > >
> > > Looks fine, actually IO_URING_F_NONBLOCK change isn't a must, and the
> > > approach in V2 doesn't need this change.
> > >
> > >>
> > >>> @@ -3363,6 +3367,12 @@ __cold void io_uring_cancel_generic(bool cancel_all, struct io_sq_data *sqd)
> > >>> finish_wait(&tctx->wait, &wait);
> > >>> } while (1);
> > >>>
> > >>> + /*
> > >>> + * Reap events from each ctx, otherwise these requests may take
> > >>> + * resources and prevent other contexts from being moved on.
> > >>> + */
> > >>> + xa_for_each(&tctx->xa, index, node)
> > >>> + io_iopoll_try_reap_events(node->ctx);
> > >>
> > >> The main issue here is that if someone isn't polling for them, then we
> > >
> > > That is actually what this patch is addressing, :-)
> >
> > Right, that part is obvious :)
> >
> > >> get to wait for a timeout before they complete. This can delay exit, for
> > >> example, as we're now just waiting 30 seconds (or whatever the timeout
> > >> is on the underlying device) for them to get timed out before exit can
> > >> finish.
> > >
> > > For the issue on null_blk, device timeout handler provides
> > > forward-progress, such as requests are released, so new IO can be
> > > handled.
> > >
> > > However, not all devices support timeout, such as virtio device.
> >
> > That's a bug in the driver, you cannot sanely support polled IO and not
> > be able to deal with timeouts. Someone HAS to reap the requests and
> > there are only two things that can do that - the application doing the
> > polled IO, or if that doesn't happen, a timeout.
>
> OK, then device driver timeout handler has new responsibility of covering
> userspace accident, :-)
>
> We may document this requirement for driver.
>
> So far the only one should be virtio-blk, and the two virtio storage
> drivers never implement timeout handler.
>
Adding Stefan for more comments.
Thanks
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-09-15 7:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-09-08 9:30 [PATCH V3] io_uring: fix IO hang in io_wq_put_and_exit from do_exit() Ming Lei
2023-09-08 13:49 ` Jens Axboe
2023-09-08 14:34 ` Ming Lei
2023-09-08 14:44 ` Jens Axboe
2023-09-08 15:25 ` Ming Lei
2023-09-15 7:04 ` Jason Wang [this message]
2023-09-25 21:17 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2023-09-26 1:28 ` Ming Lei
2023-09-26 14:55 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2023-09-08 15:46 ` Pavel Begunkov
2023-09-09 1:43 ` Ming Lei
2023-09-13 12:53 ` Pavel Begunkov
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CACGkMEvP=f1mB=01CDOhHaDLNL9espKPrUffgHEdBVkW4fo=pw@mail.gmail.com' \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox